Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is facing its first lawsuit after more than 3000 people in the UK claimed that the baby powder is potentially causing cancer.
As reported by BBC thousands of people claimed that their families had developed forms of ovarian cancer or mesothelioma from using Johnson’s baby powder between 1965 and 2023.
The lawsuit has been filed by KP Law at the High Court in London, claiming that J&J’s baby talcum powder was contaminated with carcinogenic fibers, including the key cancer ingredient asbestos, and that the firm concealed this risk to the public for decades.
Although talc is a naturally occurring mineral that is mined, Michael Rawlinson KC, who was representing the claimants in court, documented that “almost all talc deposits in the world contain asbestos.”
He also alleged that reports from the mines, as well as existing scientific literature and J&J's own research, are proof that J&J products have asbestos contamination.
Moreover, J&J had faced tens of thousands of lawsuits in America, where claimants alleged that they were diagnosed with cancer after using baby powder and other talc products.
As reported by Sky News, the pharmaceutical giant J&J was ordered to pay $966m (£720m) to one of the families of a woman who died from mesothelioma last week.
With reference to previous cases, J&J stopped selling talc-based baby powders in 2023 and switched to a cornstarch product, as it had done in the U.S., but continued using talc-based products again after a while.
While Rawlinson claimed that despite having clear reports, the company suppressed information, the pharma giant lobbied regulators to enable the continued sale of its product and sponsored studies to downplay the dangers to human health.
Many of the claimants in the UK who are suffering currently or have died from ovarian cancer or mesothelioma exposure claimed to have used J&J’s baby powder over an extended period of time.
Claimants accused J&J of knowing there were carcinogenic fibers in the baby powder, yet the firm's marketing team discussed how to maximize sales.
One of the claimants Siobhan Ryan who frequently used J&J’s product said “They knew it was contaminated and still they sold it to new mums and their babies.”
The claim alleges J&J had identified asbestos in its baby powder as early as the 1960s.
Moreover, one internal document from J&J in 1973 allegedly says: "Our baby powder contains talc fragments classifiable as fiber. Occasionally, sub-trace quantities of tremolite or actinolite are identifiable.”
This court trial also included deposition testimony from Dr. Steve Mann, former director of toxicology at J&J Consumer Products, who said he had made safety claims without reviewing any test data.
Dr Mann conceded that he had received test results showing asbestos in the baby powder but chose not to inform management or regulators.
The judge noted that safer alternatives, such as cornstarch, were available and known to the company. Yet, J&J continued selling talc-based powder. Instead of declaring warnings on the bottle, the lawsuit claims J&J moved to conceal the risk for decades and maximize profits.
In the context of the claims, the lawsuit enabled the company to maintain claims of product purity, stop misleading regulators and consumers about the presence of asbestos in its talc products.
In relation to that, J&J has moved its consumer health wing to a new company, 'Kenvue,’ which said, "We sympathize deeply with people living with cancer and we understand that they and their families want answers - that's why the facts are so important."
Kenvue stated that the safety of the baby powder was supported by years of testing by leading laboratories, universities, and health authorities in the UK and around the world. J&J's baby powder did not contain asbestos and does not cause cancer.
